hussain123
Tape Ball Captain
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2014
- Runs
- 1,282
India was a ala todays pakistan team in 90s.And are you seriously rating sri lanka as the third best side.lol.even india batting after 2009-10 was not the same.
-
Contact the PP Team
Can Dale Steyn ever match the greatness of Wasim Akram?
- Thread starter ftbno1
- Start date
India was a ala todays pakistan team in 90s.And are you seriously rating sri lanka as the third best side.lol.even india batting after 2009-10 was not the same.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Runs
- 27,215
- Post of the Week
- 3
Thread is about Steyn and Wasim so you are obviously going to get arguments about these two. Now since you took some names,
Hadleed & Ambrose are indeed rated higher by most. Most rate IK, Donald, Wasim at the same level. You simply have to check some non-Pakistani forum to see that I am not way off the mark here. In fact, many PPers hold the same view despite being Pakistani fans.
But majority liked watching Wasim because cricket is not watched only for wickets or wins. You watch it to enjoy and Wasim could bowl all kinds of deliveries. But when all said and done, bowlers job is to take wickets cheaply and quickly. If 4 bowlers do it better in that aspect after you normalize it for era, oppositions, venues, longevity and so on ... then it's hard to argue that those 4 are not better performers.
No one simply takes career aggregate average and SR without context to rate anyone. There are very good reasons that Waqar & Pollock never get mentioned along with top tier greats who were gun performer running through sides in all conditions. Check Pollock's number of 5-fers and you will see why he doesn't get rated as high as Donald despite having great average in all conditions. For Waqar, , check what he has done away from home and in different conditions. Clearly, taking only aggregate average and SR to jump to any conclusion will be error prone. Once you add some context of era, venue, oppositions, ability to run through sides etc with stats then stats become meaningful otherwise Mominul from BD will become the best batsman in world.
And off course, we can simply say XYZ was better without presenting any argument. That simply means that there can't be any debate and there is nothing wrong in that as well. People will have their own perceptions by simply watching the games. I saw both and I have absolutely no doubt who I will pick. Debates are just for fun.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Nope, this isn't the case. Forums don't decide the ratings of players. Many haven't even seen Marshall yet they rate him #1 and almost no one has seen Bradman play, still he makes every all time XI.
The first site I referred to after reading your post was Cricinfo, and here is their World XI
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/magazine/alltime_composite.html
Wasim, Lillee and Marshall filling the pacers slots. Not even McGrath, let alone others.
And this is what they say about the jury.
No case of being biased or prejudice.
hussain123
Tape Ball Captain
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2014
- Runs
- 1,282
Keyboard war aside,Wasim is rated highly by most of his peers or those who played with or against him.Top batsmen and bowlers of his era rate him as the most outstsnding bowler of their generation.As for steyn vs wasim comparison,a bowler higher than wasim,who cant win a single world cup for his side, and lost his side a place in the final and he is rated than wasim.amazing.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Runs
- 27,215
- Post of the Week
- 3
I am not giving my opinions for Sl being more diiifcult side to bowl here. I simply presented a fact which lists all batting sides by runs per wicket. That's an objective list. For all the discussions, if WI made 30 runs per wicket then they made 30 runs per wicket. Yes, Sl batting may been built on doing well in mainly in SL but guess what that's where 50% of time any bowler is going to bowl.
Do you know why Lara has a grand total of only 5-6 centuries in wins against non-minnows despite having great bowlers like Ambrose, Walsh etc. WI batting wasn't that great when Lara played. So now anyone using the same batting to prove that Wasim was gun performers against top batting sides like WI is using an extremely weak argument.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Runs
- 27,215
- Post of the Week
- 3
That's the only thing happening here so what do you mean by Keyboard was aside? That's what folks do in these forums.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Runs
- 27,215
- Post of the Week
- 3
* Keyboard war *
My two Cents:
In ODIs Wasim >> Steyn
In Tests Steyn > Wasim
They were both ATG of their time and also one of the most complete fast bowlers of all time. They both had swing, pace, bouncers, reverse swing. They had everything a bowler can dream off. Like Wasim Steyn will be remember for long time for his master class outswing, I have not seen anybody bowl outswing better than him, this is one of the most difficult delivery for right arm fast bowler and he mastered it to perfection.
Wasim and Waqar both decline steeply after 96 in test, specially Waqar because of back injury. For first 10 years Wasim stats in test were lot better, in last 3/4 years Wasim dragged himself in test, where as in ODI he was potent all 18 years of his Career. Steyn, may find it hard once he looses yard of a pace, in next 2/3 years.
BTW: before 1996 Waqar was quite a bit better than Wasim. Waqar was world no 1 bowler for 2/3 years, ahead of Ambrose and Donald. Where as Wasim was never world no 1 bowler in ranking (I am talking about test). I am a lefty but used to enjoy Waqar more than Wasim when both in full swing. Waqar's action, pace, reverse swing was touch better than Wasim... Where as Wasim was a wizard!!
The reason Wasim is such a legend and inspiration for generations to follow, because he was the first left arm bowler who had so much skill. He could swing ball both ways, had great bouncer, I don't have to mention reverse swing and yorkers... None of the WIs,SA,AUS bowlers had so much skill packed in one guy. He was unfortunate to play for Pakistan, who don't focus on test cricket. Pakistan alway value ODI more and he was an absolute legend of an ODI bowler.
One of the reason Pakistani Cricketers don't feature too well in test cricket stats is lack of test Cricket. For example Wasim Akram only played 100 odd tests in 18 years. YK is playing for 15 years and has yet to play 100, where as Cook cross 100 in 7/8 years. As a bowler, you want to play more when you are young and inform, that's how you get better averages. And play longer series 4/5 test, it has being almost a decade since Pakistan played 4 test matches. Pakistan produce lot better bowlers than many teams, specially if you look at quality of both spin and fast, no other country had produced so many both fast bowlers and spinners. Unfortunately they don't get to show case their talent as often as others
Today we look around, just in last world cup, one can immediately feel the impact of Wasim, all top bowlers were left arm. They all were inspired by Wasim at one time or another. There is no batsman who had such an impact, he mad left arm fast bowling cool and inspirational...His legacy is still very strong!!
In ODIs Wasim >> Steyn
In Tests Steyn > Wasim
They were both ATG of their time and also one of the most complete fast bowlers of all time. They both had swing, pace, bouncers, reverse swing. They had everything a bowler can dream off. Like Wasim Steyn will be remember for long time for his master class outswing, I have not seen anybody bowl outswing better than him, this is one of the most difficult delivery for right arm fast bowler and he mastered it to perfection.
Wasim and Waqar both decline steeply after 96 in test, specially Waqar because of back injury. For first 10 years Wasim stats in test were lot better, in last 3/4 years Wasim dragged himself in test, where as in ODI he was potent all 18 years of his Career. Steyn, may find it hard once he looses yard of a pace, in next 2/3 years.
BTW: before 1996 Waqar was quite a bit better than Wasim. Waqar was world no 1 bowler for 2/3 years, ahead of Ambrose and Donald. Where as Wasim was never world no 1 bowler in ranking (I am talking about test). I am a lefty but used to enjoy Waqar more than Wasim when both in full swing. Waqar's action, pace, reverse swing was touch better than Wasim... Where as Wasim was a wizard!!
The reason Wasim is such a legend and inspiration for generations to follow, because he was the first left arm bowler who had so much skill. He could swing ball both ways, had great bouncer, I don't have to mention reverse swing and yorkers... None of the WIs,SA,AUS bowlers had so much skill packed in one guy. He was unfortunate to play for Pakistan, who don't focus on test cricket. Pakistan alway value ODI more and he was an absolute legend of an ODI bowler.
One of the reason Pakistani Cricketers don't feature too well in test cricket stats is lack of test Cricket. For example Wasim Akram only played 100 odd tests in 18 years. YK is playing for 15 years and has yet to play 100, where as Cook cross 100 in 7/8 years. As a bowler, you want to play more when you are young and inform, that's how you get better averages. And play longer series 4/5 test, it has being almost a decade since Pakistan played 4 test matches. Pakistan produce lot better bowlers than many teams, specially if you look at quality of both spin and fast, no other country had produced so many both fast bowlers and spinners. Unfortunately they don't get to show case their talent as often as others
Today we look around, just in last world cup, one can immediately feel the impact of Wasim, all top bowlers were left arm. They all were inspired by Wasim at one time or another. There is no batsman who had such an impact, he mad left arm fast bowling cool and inspirational...His legacy is still very strong!!
Nikhil_cric
Senior Test Player
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2011
- Runs
- 29,466
Lol leave it. Some of the Ppers are taking it a bit personally. They forget that most of us consider Wasim to be an all time top 10 fast bowler in tests alone and many of us were in awe of his ability. Only a handful are rated above Waz but I guess its too much to ask Ppers to see that
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Runs
- 27,215
- Post of the Week
- 3
World XI is your best XI and it's about maximizing your chance of covering all bases. It's not simply about listing 6 best batsmen and 5 best bowlers. I will also pick Wasim many times in world XI over many others who I rate higher than Wasim.
If you meant to say that forums views are not meaningful then this entire discussion is meaningless. I don't have anything against that view but point of forums and having threads like this is to have discussions and get views from cricket fans across the world. If you want to ignore that then it's fine as well.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Runs
- 27,215
- Post of the Week
- 3
Spot on with your comments here. Cricket is not simply about scoring runs and taking wickets. It's a sports and we watch it for entertainment. Wasim was a great entertainer and most folks loved watching him. No wonder he inspired so many young cricketers.
hussain123
Tape Ball Captain
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2014
- Runs
- 1,282
Sir, what I meant was that if we can keeping our "bias"glasses aside for a moment and see what the former cricketers have to say about them and how much they rate them individually can help us arriving at some common ground.I personally rate steyn a better test bowler.but wasim in odis is so much better and has won so many games.which means, wasim was a better bowler taking into account all the formats.
as-95
Local Club Star
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2013
- Runs
- 2,064
[MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] stats are highly flawed and only serve his own agenda. We are talking about the most dominant sides of Wasim and Steyn's era and "the team that had the highest number of runs per wicket" is a very poor representation of a dominant team. For example, a team with high average runs per wicket can have weak bowling and thus alleviate the pressure on the opposing team causing them to lose many many matches. It is farcical to assume this stat represents the most dominant side.
However, although all stats are flawed, if there was a single stat to determine the most dominant side over an extended period, it would be the team's Win Loss ratio. This stat is also flawed(like all stats), but it will give us a much better representation of a dominant side than the average runs per wicket. Now that this is out of the way, let's get on with the number crunching...
4 Most dominant sides when Wasim played(using W/L ratio)
So out of the 4 most dominant sides of his era, Wasim played against 3 of them. These are South Africa, Australia and West Indies.
4 Most dominant sides when Steyn played (using W/L ratio)
So out of the 4 most dominant sides of his era, Steyn played against 3 of them too. These are Autralia, England and India.
Now that we have found a representation of the 4 most dominant sides using the W/L ratio of each side in Wasim and Steyn's respective eras, lets see how both performed against them.
Wasim averaged 25.76 against Australia, 20.82 against WIndies and 29.76 against South Africa.
His average against Australia is very good and simply phenomenal vs the WIndies. Although his average against South Africa is below par, the sample size is a minuscule 4 matches and can be ignored as an outlier.
Steyn on the other hand averaged 27.13 against Australia, 20.93 against India and 32.63 against England. Having checked the sample size for his matches against England in order to find a reason for this woeful bowling average, it was accumulated in 20 innings so cannot be excused as an outlier.
-------------------------------------------------------------
From these stats, it is clear that Wasim was a top performer who also brought his A Game against the most dominant sides of his era and performed on the World Stage.
Steyn on the other hand, performed very well against India, but wasn't impressive against Australia and was woeful against England(with a good sample size).
--------------------------------------------------------------
To conclude, Wasim's stats against the most dominant sides are more impressive and Steyn's suggest that he MAY have deflated his average against the less dominant sides in his era. There is no doubt in my eyes that Steyn is a great fast bowler albeit inferior to the likes of Wasim. The BIG plus for Steyn though, is that he has time on his side and if he can prove himself more against the more dominant sides and show something on the World Stage, one day he may reach the level of Wasim Akram.
However, although all stats are flawed, if there was a single stat to determine the most dominant side over an extended period, it would be the team's Win Loss ratio. This stat is also flawed(like all stats), but it will give us a much better representation of a dominant side than the average runs per wicket. Now that this is out of the way, let's get on with the number crunching...
4 Most dominant sides when Wasim played(using W/L ratio)
So out of the 4 most dominant sides of his era, Wasim played against 3 of them. These are South Africa, Australia and West Indies.
4 Most dominant sides when Steyn played (using W/L ratio)
So out of the 4 most dominant sides of his era, Steyn played against 3 of them too. These are Autralia, England and India.
Now that we have found a representation of the 4 most dominant sides using the W/L ratio of each side in Wasim and Steyn's respective eras, lets see how both performed against them.
Wasim averaged 25.76 against Australia, 20.82 against WIndies and 29.76 against South Africa.
His average against Australia is very good and simply phenomenal vs the WIndies. Although his average against South Africa is below par, the sample size is a minuscule 4 matches and can be ignored as an outlier.
Steyn on the other hand averaged 27.13 against Australia, 20.93 against India and 32.63 against England. Having checked the sample size for his matches against England in order to find a reason for this woeful bowling average, it was accumulated in 20 innings so cannot be excused as an outlier.
-------------------------------------------------------------
From these stats, it is clear that Wasim was a top performer who also brought his A Game against the most dominant sides of his era and performed on the World Stage.
Steyn on the other hand, performed very well against India, but wasn't impressive against Australia and was woeful against England(with a good sample size).
--------------------------------------------------------------
To conclude, Wasim's stats against the most dominant sides are more impressive and Steyn's suggest that he MAY have deflated his average against the less dominant sides in his era. There is no doubt in my eyes that Steyn is a great fast bowler albeit inferior to the likes of Wasim. The BIG plus for Steyn though, is that he has time on his side and if he can prove himself more against the more dominant sides and show something on the World Stage, one day he may reach the level of Wasim Akram.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Yes, its about covering all bases, but you don't compromise the quality of players. Its about right combination in the sense (typical combination), you pick 2 openers, one wicket-keeper, 4 middle order batsman, an allrounder, a spinner and 3 pacers. Your point about covering bases means, that if I pick an opener, that doesn't necessarily mean that he is better than any middle order batsman I haven't selected.
But, the 4 middle order batsman I have picked are all better than any other middle order batsman I haven't picked.
I couldn't pick Lara over Sachin just because he is left handed. Similarly I can't pick Hayden over Gavasker cuz of him being lefty.
The three pacers picked are the ones considered best three fast bowlers in the history. The ones not picked have to compete with these three, not with any spinner or allrounder.
I personally consider Imran a better player than Wasim but he misses out that XI spot because of Sobers because he is competing for allrounder slot. Just as you said, not picking Imran don't make him lesser than Wasim, but for the sake of covering bases, we have to pick Wasim and leave out Imran.
This discussion, isn't meaningless. You do learn from forums but you can't say that an outcome of a forum is hard and fast rule. In another Indian forum, they concluded that Kapil > Imran. Are we supposed to believe that?
As a matter of fact, Wasim even made it to all time XI voted by fans. But I don't rate such lists since I can expect fans being biased (they voted Sehwag as well).
But there is much less likelihood if making an error of judgement when such lists are picked by former captains of international sides, cricket historians and writers.[SUB][/SUB]
Last edited:
WrexEverything
Tape Ball Star
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
- Runs
- 913
For the record, I have never understood why XIs have only one allrounder slot. I get the logic of selecting the best bowler available, but if you're giving me the choice between Wasim and Imran, I will select Imran first anyday. Personally, the ideal 6-7-8 in an ATG world XI should be the best batting allrounder, followed by the best wicketkeeper batsman, followed by the best bowling allrounder. Sobers-Gilchrist-Imran. For me, it's a combination that is absolutely perfect.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Runs
- 27,215
- Post of the Week
- 3
Bowler is going to bowl to batsmen , right? Sl as a team may not have won much in 90s but their batting unit was pretty good and that's reflected in runs per wicket scored by SL batsmen. WI had a weak batting unit during Wasim's career and that's reflected in their runs per wicket.
You can give credit for performing against good test sides but as a bowler you are going to bowl against batsmen and as a batsmen you are going to score runs against bowlers. If you do it against better ones then more credit should be given. WI won more games simply due to having great bowlers and not due to having a gun batting unit. Yes, you can give credit to anyone for performing against the dominant side but you have to look why that side was dominating.
Great Aus/WI teams had gun batting and gun bowling both. So doing well against them either as bowler or batsman was great. Same things can't be said about all teams if they have lopsided batting or bowling. You do have to see if they are dominating due to strong batting or strong bowling unit. WI comes 7th as batting side when Wasim played so not sure how much credit you want to give to Wasim for performing well against 7th best batting unit just because the same batting unit happens to have the likes of Ambrose, Walsh etc.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Runs
- 27,215
- Post of the Week
- 3
Well, in PP you get threads talking about Razzaq being better than Kapil and in some Indian forum you may have seen Kapil being rated higher than IK. I will put more weight on neutral forums in such cases and in any neutral forum you will never see these kinds of conclusions.
When I put widely held belief about pecking order of bowlers , I was referring to neutral forums. I won't really put much weight into SA forums rating Steyn higher or WI forum rating Lara higher even if I may agree with that conclusion. But if I see the same conclusions in Aus, Eng and other forums then I do put more weight.
WrexEverything
Tape Ball Star
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
- Runs
- 913
Example: Cricketweb. Far more sensible and neutral forum. Zero jingosim.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Runs
- 27,215
- Post of the Week
- 3
I don't have much different opinion that you here. So there you go , we have a common ground.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Some genuinely good posts in this thread by all including you.
But I have a question.
Why does Akram's 1985-2002 average against top sides have a DIRECT comparison with Steyn's 2004-2011 average against top sides?
When batsmen of 80s era get extra credit for their performances, why is that aspect not awarded to bowlers of the 2000s and 2010s?
1. Your analysis is nice but I am not sure whether I can directly take the averages like that.
2. But let's take that analyse with their peers using your yardstick.
Best bowlers from 1985 to 2002 against Aus, SA and WI - the best teams (min 50 wickets to have a good sample set)
Best bowlers from 2004 to 2015 against Aus, Eng and Ind - the best teams (min 50 wickets to have a good sample set)
Steyn is at No 3 with 3 runs more average than the best bowler (according to criteria) but with DOUBLE the sample set compared to his nearest competitors.
Akram is at No 5 with 5 runs more average than the best bowler (according to criteria) with much better sample set compared to his nearest competitors
Now point to be noted is that Akram had to compete with monsters (Hadlee, Ambrose, McGrath) unlike Steyn so this is not a big deal in favour of Steyn.
At home, Akram averaged 19 against these teams compared to Steyn's 26.
Now here we may dispute Steyn's home being easier but the rules for reverse swing were more relaxed too. Let's compare away where both of them where things are more neutral and no arguments can be made for or against.
Away, Akram averaged 26 while Steyn averaged 26 too.
Even stevens regarding this ok?
Now here comes the question:
1. Are the pitches of today's times anywhere close to what it was in the past?
In fact, do check what England did in 2012 to counter Steyn. They prepared batsmen friendly tracks. Would England dare to give Steyn that Lord's track they gave us? Or the tracks in those next 3 tests? Steyn would eat them alive.
SA tour of Aus had some of the WORST pitches (except for Perth test) and Steyn still managed to get that average to be 26.
If you feel pitches are the same, then guys like Kohli and Rahane for what they did in Australia (brutality of innings) must be 10,000 better than Lara, Sobers, Sachin or any ATG.
Conclusion
Wasim is definitely a more skilled bowler and overall (Tests + ODIs) is MUCH better than Steyn.
In tests though, Steyn has overcome some major challenges and produced countless match winning and series defining spells.
Yes, he blows hot and cold but he produces that spells which tilts the series and wins you games out of nowhere.
Last edited:
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Never saw Razzaq>Kapil thread, but there might exist one of you say so.
I would rather believe on neutral experts (like cricinfo jury) rather neutral layman (fans on forums).
Fans judgement is heavily inclined to how a particular player has performed against that country. Lillee is neutral to both India and Pakistan but Aussies and English fans rate him much higher than Asian fans. Ofcourse there are few who have balanced opinions, I am talking about the general perception.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Wasim for skills.
Steyn for results due to his crazy spells.
This is the most conflicting thread I have been.
My gut says Steyn is the better Test bowler because he simply swings the match and series in your favour.
Even after getting carted by Indians, he was the one who won the series for SA in 2013 due to that Durban spell.
Steyn for results due to his crazy spells.
This is the most conflicting thread I have been.
My gut says Steyn is the better Test bowler because he simply swings the match and series in your favour.
Even after getting carted by Indians, he was the one who won the series for SA in 2013 due to that Durban spell.
WrexEverything
Tape Ball Star
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
- Runs
- 913
Exactly. This is such a weird quirk. No one gives the bowlers of 2000s extra credit despite on the other hand taking credit away from batsmen for batting of pattas.
Neferpitou
First Class Player
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2015
- Runs
- 2,642
Are you implying Wasim never had these spells, lol?
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
- Runs
- 27,215
- Post of the Week
- 3
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Absolutely not. Wasim had those spells too.
But Steyn had them more.
He would blow hot and cold at times but would come forth and swing the series in your favour. Even if you exclude SA batting which wins them matches and series, he would bring about a collapse and he does it without ATG bowling partners or great spinners.
He has good support bowlers though.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
I care more about wisdom and precision in judgement than that noise!
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Dude, you live in an era where players like Hafeez average 40 in Tests, Chris Gayle and Sehwag has 2 triple tons and Rohit Sharma scores double tons in ODIs when Kallis couldn't score them even in Tests. Moreover in the same time, a team totals stands at 21/9, someone breaks the record for fastest 50 wickets in 100 years and gulf between home and away performances is increasing. Its not as simple to just count the flat tracks of recent times and move on.
Thats why I said you got to look beyond stats to see who comes on top.
Wasim could take wicket at any stage of the game while same can't be said about Steyn. He takes most his wickets when momentum is with him.
Of course, he is an ATG bowler, thats why he is able to capitalize on momentum. Give him marks for that. But lack of quality bowlers along with conditions have boosted the modern day batsmen averages. And ofcourse when they have to face the only great bowler of the time (Steyn), they fail.
I posted the data of 25 best batsman of their times and compared their performances against them. Wasim even won there. There is more to that guy than just skill.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Neferpitou
First Class Player
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2015
- Runs
- 2,642
Post sir.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Thanks bro
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Obviously when conditions are easier, mediocre batsmen will become good batsmen and good ones will look far better than what they are.
So what?
For every easy Hafeez wicket Steyn gets, he has to slog to get a wicket of Kohli, Smith, Root (dunno the actual names who did well but just using examples) in today's times.
India (as posted by as-95) is one of the top teams as per WL ration and a beast at home. Steyn averages 20 against us AT our home.
Plus Steyn averages 22 with a ridiculous SR in Asia.
NO ATG support bowler. No great spinner.
But he does it in Asia.
Him and Akram still average 26 against the top 4 teams (AWAY - so that no debates about preparation of ball or about SA home conditions arises).
Difference is that Steyn is playing in a batting era.
So by virtue of Hafeez and Rohit scoring easy runs, we conclude that all batsmen have lost skill in today's era and Steyn has to pay the price in the sense?
Its ok to rate Wasim or Steyn, I have no personal interests but I don't agree with the reasoning at all.
So what?
For every easy Hafeez wicket Steyn gets, he has to slog to get a wicket of Kohli, Smith, Root (dunno the actual names who did well but just using examples) in today's times.
India (as posted by as-95) is one of the top teams as per WL ration and a beast at home. Steyn averages 20 against us AT our home.
Plus Steyn averages 22 with a ridiculous SR in Asia.
NO ATG support bowler. No great spinner.
But he does it in Asia.
Him and Akram still average 26 against the top 4 teams (AWAY - so that no debates about preparation of ball or about SA home conditions arises).
Difference is that Steyn is playing in a batting era.
So by virtue of Hafeez and Rohit scoring easy runs, we conclude that all batsmen have lost skill in today's era and Steyn has to pay the price in the sense?
Its ok to rate Wasim or Steyn, I have no personal interests but I don't agree with the reasoning at all.
Neferpitou
First Class Player
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2015
- Runs
- 2,642
Which is why I rate him by his performances against the top teams. He's done well against India but failed against Australia and England which is not good enough.
I rate Steyn even below Donald who's actually in the same league as Wasim, McGrath, Imran, Ambrose, Marshall, Hadlee.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Didn't get this though.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
And that point has been explained bro.
I did several times.
This is an era of not just flatter tracks but pitch manipulation too.
Do see what England did for SA series of 2012 to save their No 1 ranking.
Would they dare to give Steyn the Lord's track or the track we had in 3rd, 4th or 5th?
And Aus...the less said about their pitches in recent times the better. They just seem to get flatter with bounce and almost no seam movement. SRT and Gavaskar have 5,6 centuries in Australia and Kohli had 4 of them in one series. And he got it striking at 3-4 rpo in many of the innings. And Indians aren't sure about Kohli's ability to play consistent probing line even now.
The pitches they gave to SA in 2012/13 were dreadful apart from Perth where Steyn had the series defining spell.
Chrish
First Class Captain
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 4,827
- Post of the Week
- 1
Donald was never in a league of Marshall, McGrath or Ambrose .. He was a league below.. And most of the fans consider Steyn to be a better bowler than Donald..
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Mediocre batsmen find it easy in this era but good batsmen find it EASIER. While you can get mediocre batsmen out with a good delivery, a good batsmen wouldn't get out to the same one. And now the pitch makes it hard to dismiss him.
Plus its not a linear thing.
Logically ATGs should average far higher than FTBs in patta tracks but they don't. Both average the same (eg - Mahela FTB and Sanga ATG - so many other examples too). The difference comes in tougher tracks where FTBs flop and ATGs shine.
You can't take a hopeless case like Hafeez who will get out to even Bangladesh bowlers if there is swing.
In today's tracks, Steyn may get to face hacks or FTBs but they are armed with flat tracks which make them very effective. And when he faces really good bats, he finds it a bit more tougher too.
Neferpitou
First Class Player
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2015
- Runs
- 2,642
C'mon now don't start with the pitches. Wasim laughs at that argument. You're clutching at straws, bottom line is he didn't perform against them even at home like a top 5 bowler should have.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Good.
So you accept that Kohli is greater than all world ATGs (in Australia pitches) and most likely would have carted McGrath too cos Ryan Harris averages in low 20s and Kohli carted him?
Steyn at home against those teams (series averages)
Away Steyn averages the same as Akram against Top 4 teams and in THIS ERA of pitches.
At home, his averages is 26 overall but he was rubbish in that one series in 2004/05 and dropped and post that he averaged 23 at home.
So he isn't that great at home due to one bad series a decade back when he was a noob?
Wasim surely wouldn't want to win based on a technicality like that?
Overall...Steyn has overcome a lot of hurdles to do well.
Last edited:
Robert
Test Star
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2007
- Runs
- 37,604
- Post of the Week
- 1
I'd put Donald in the same bracket as those guys.
He didn't start in internationals until age 26. He would have had 550 test wickets otherwise.
Neferpitou
First Class Player
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2015
- Runs
- 2,642
[MENTION=134809]sensible-indian-fan[/MENTION] Whatever man, you're nitpicking now. Don't think we're gonna get anywhere. Gonna stop here.
Chrish
First Class Captain
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 4,827
- Post of the Week
- 1
How would rate Steyn vs Donald Robert?
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
I posted the overall data as well apart from singling out Hafeez (because he is first such example that comes to the mind and also him being bunny of Steyn). (Post in the previous page)
See the rate of collapses in the eras. Its not linear but its enough to notice the trend. Not only one player, but whole batting line collapses. Just like you didn't agree with the reasoning at first place, you may not agree with this point but let me say this
The overall standards of batting have declined in recent times.
Despite of batsman averaging more. Have explained it earlier, the gulf between the home and away performances is increasing. The reason is teams tend to make the pitches that suit their batsman. They score heavily at home, outclass the opponent who don't have the bowling to take wickets under those conditions. But they fail miserably overseas.
But
Even that hopeless FTB's, when play a quality bowler, even at home conditions, they still fail. The problem is that we don't have many quality bowlers in this era to exploit their weaknesses. And the only real ATG (Steyn) does exploit that.
Not comes your point of good batsman finding it easier. Thats where we have to compare Wasim and Steyn, on the account of good batsmen performances against their teams.
Again, see my post at previous page. I took top 25 batsman and their record against Wasim's and Steyn's respective bowling attacks.
Lesser top players have scored against Wasim than against Steyn.
When a quality player has really been provided with patta, Steyn has failed unfortunately. Whether its 600+ partnership, or Sehwag 300, or consecutive double tons by Clarke even Kohli Pujara who struggled against Anderson got better of him.
But you still got to give it to Steyn, to manage that record (even if he has failed on those rare occasions where Wasim would likely have succeeded, just an assumption considering facts), shouldn't forget that overall record (even ICC ranking) is heavily impacted by Hafeez, Dilshan sort of players.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
How is this nitpicking yaar.
One bad series when you are a noob doesn't impact views much. That's a valid point.
I am just having a conversation.
Anyways, I guess this is a never ending topic. So I will sleep tonight and maybe see this thread tomorrow.
Neferpitou
First Class Player
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2015
- Runs
- 2,642
Btw [MENTION=138483]Stallion__[/MENTION] those are some great stats in context on the last page. Just went through them now.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Btw, Mahela is not a pure FTB, he is a borderline case.
Still there exist difference of 9 runs/wicket between him and Sanga.
Not mentioning it in the context but just pointing out the fact.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Thanks mate
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
1. Rate of collapses may be more but that's also got to with the fact that when you have a FTB/flat track era and you have a green mamba, collapses are inevitable.
Batting quality may have reduced FOR TOUGHER TRACKS (due to lesser practice) but they remain as good if not better for easier tracks with FTBs learning how to smash better.
And since the latter is the playground now...Steyn is doing well.
I gave you a crystal clear example of how FTBs and ATGs don't have much difference on easy tracks. Its tough tracks where the gap is shown. Sehwag is as good if not better than SRT in SC.
2. You say:
Notice the keyword BOWLING ATTACK.
Akram had ATG bowlers and great spinners to get wickets which would show the average of batsmen DIPPING in games where Akram has played.
Take Sachin Tendulkar for example
He played 4 tests against Pakistan in 1989/90. Got dismissed by Akram once. Had an average of 35.
So this 35 average is because of Akram or Imran Khan, Waqar and Qadir getting him out?
Let's dig deeper.
In the next 3 games in 1998/99, he was not dismissed by Akram EVEN ONCE.
It was Saqlain, Saqlain, Saqlain, Mustaq Muhammed, Akhtar, run out.
Sachin's average when playing against Pakistan with Akram is 35 odd. But Akram got him out only once.
So why should Akram get the credit for having ATG bowlers doing the job when Steyn has none?
So this bowling attack is not a valid argument.
3. Steyn has demolished lineups and won games at a crazy rate without ATG partners or great spinners.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
[MENTION=138483]Stallion__[/MENTION] [MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] [MENTION=134706]as-95[/MENTION] [MENTION=138983]Neferpitou[/MENTION] [MENTION=138855]WrexEverything[/MENTION]
This may be a never ending discussion but totally enjoyed this thread.
Others will have a lot to add. I will check out all the responses and posts tomorrow morning.
This may be a never ending discussion but totally enjoyed this thread.
Others will have a lot to add. I will check out all the responses and posts tomorrow morning.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Nope this isn't that simple. We are not talking about the ODI's.
The first thing I did was to mention overall stats in that post. And I clearly pointed out, that although the average in Steyn's era has increased by 2.5, SR of bowlers have decreased by 4
Its became clear which thing has impacted more, batsman's inability or flat tracks both creating the opposite effect. That flat theory is literally over-rated.
I clearly realized that I have mentioned words 'bowling attack'. And I was even aware of Sachin's stats against Wasim.
But that the most optimum way for comparison. Since I can't exactly get data of how many runs they score against these bowlers only.
Having said that, this issue of bowling support isn't significant. We are not comparing Murali or Hadlee with someone that we need this point as a tie breaker. Steyn has decent enough support, whether its Pollock, Ntini, Philander or Morkel (I personally rate this support better than Wasim's support).
Lets go factual. Bowling average difference overall in averages of era if 2.5. The difference between these two bowling attacks (the word you pointed out) is even less than 2. (SR is actually better)
Bowling average of Wasim's Bowling Attack
Bowling average of Steyn's Bowling Attack
Again, thats the extension of the second point. Though, as I said, I have already noticed this and has given more marks to Steyn for this than that to Akram.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
[MENTION=138483]Stallion__[/MENTION] [MENTION=97523]Buffet[/MENTION] [MENTION=134706]as-95[/MENTION] [MENTION=138983]Neferpitou[/MENTION] [MENTION=138855]WrexEverything[/MENTION]
This may be a never ending discussion but totally enjoyed this thread.
Others will have a lot to add. I will check out all the responses and posts tomorrow morning.
Sure dude. I am enjoying as well. In debate with some of my fav posters
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Nope this isn't that simple. We are not talking about the ODI's.
The first thing I did was to mention overall stats in that post. And I clearly pointed out, that although the average in Steyn's era has increased by 2.5, SR of bowlers have decreased by 4
Its became clear which thing has impacted more, batsman's inability or flat tracks both creating the opposite effect. That flat theory is literally over-rated.
I clearly realized that I have mentioned words 'bowling attack'. And I was even aware of Sachin's stats against Wasim.
But that the most optimum way for comparison. Since I can't exactly get data of how many runs they score against these bowlers only.
Having said that, this issue of bowling support isn't significant. We are not comparing Murali or Hadlee with someone that we need this point as a tie breaker. Steyn has decent enough support, whether its Pollock, Ntini, Philander or Morkel (I personally rate this support better than Wasim's support).
Lets go factual. Bowling average difference overall in averages of era if 2.5. The difference between these two bowling attacks (the word you pointed out) is even less than 2. (SR is actually better)
Bowling average of Wasim's Bowling Attack
Bowling average of Steyn's Bowling Attack
Again, thats the extension of the second point. Though, as I said, I have already noticed this and has given more marks to Steyn for this than that to Akram.
Bro...that actually strengthens Steyn's case even more bro.
Because of Steyn the gap is less bro. He pulls the entire lineup together. Of course he has a good support unit but nowhere close to what Wasim had for different conditions.
Here's why (see the gaps):
Pakistan bowler averages with Akram in team
SA bowler averages with Steyn in team
Pakistan bowler averages with Akram in team - AWAY RECORDS
SA bowler averages with Steyn in team - AWAY RECORDS
Pakistan bowler averages with Akram in team - OUTSIDE SC RECORDS
SA bowler averages with Steyn in team - ASIA RECORDS
See the gaps.
Steyn had a good support group (that too barring Morkel...others keep rotating in and out). Philander sample set is low and he is useless in flat tracks.
And Steyn does this in TODAY's era.
Simply simply phenomenal.
Yeah yeah....I was about to sleep before I checked your PP one last time and got tempted. I am hopeless in this. Got to go now.
Attachments
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Mesed up the first image -
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=wickets;team=7;template=results;type=bowling
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=wickets;team=7;template=results;type=bowling
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
That is a very easily explainable phenomena.
In today's era, batsmen score fast hence average of bowlers are plumeting but SR is good cos many sometimes scoring fast can give you wickets and there is a lot of slogging towards the end too in order to force a result.
While faster scoring can give you wickets, the pitches make it HARD to get them.
That's why someone like Umesh averages 36 and has a SR of 51 (which is ATG stuff for SR).
In today's era, if you don't strike at a ridiculous rate, your average will shoot up like crazy. Hence most bowlers struggle.
Steyn gets batsmen out faster than anyone in tracks that favour batsmen. Take a look at every other bowler and they find it hard to get those wickets. Its hardly easy conditions to take wickets and ADD TO THAT FLAT TRACKS made to counter certain teams unlike the past.
Plus did we account for the fact that there are no easy tailender wickets in today's times unlike the 90s?
A bowler can't simply come and blow away the tail easily these days. He has to work for it big time.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
That is a very easily explainable phenomena.
In today's era, batsmen score fast hence average of bowlers are plumeting but SR is good cos many sometimes scoring fast can give you wickets and there is a lot of slogging towards the end too in order to force a result.
While faster scoring can give you wickets, the pitches make it HARD to get them.
That's why someone like Umesh averages 36 and has a SR of 51 (which is ATG stuff for SR).
In today's era, if you don't strike at a ridiculous rate, your average will shoot up like crazy. Hence most bowlers struggle.
Steyn gets batsmen out faster than anyone in tracks that favour batsmen. Take a look at every other bowler and they find it hard to get those wickets. Its hardly easy conditions to take wickets and ADD TO THAT FLAT TRACKS made to counter certain teams unlike the past.
Plus did we account for the fact that there are no easy tailender wickets in today's times unlike the 90s?
A bowler can't simply come and blow away the tail easily these days. He has to work for it big time.
Good. Its now my time to sleep. Thanks for giving me something for morning
Will reply you in morning.
Last edited:
cricketjoshila
Test Captain
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Runs
- 47,243
- Post of the Week
- 1
Wasim Akram cannot be explained through stats.His ability to bowl that magical delivery out of nowhere which will out fox the very best in the world is matched only by Marshall and Warne.
In my life i have seen Some Greats,Few ATGs but only 3 geniuses,they being Wasim,Warne and Tendulkar(Lara was also very close to it).
In my life i have seen Some Greats,Few ATGs but only 3 geniuses,they being Wasim,Warne and Tendulkar(Lara was also very close to it).
Well Steyn's average against Australia and England isn't amazing but he has taken loads of wickets against Australia; nearly five a match. Average is 27 and in this era of bigger bats, t20 syndrome and given the fact that Australian team likes to play shots--trying to score quicker- meant that average is going to suffer a bit against them but he took wickets, loads of them. What if he were more conservative and not attacking enough and took 4 wickets per match against them instead of 5 at an average of 24. It's not really going to help a team. He also took those wickets quickly. Average means jack... He took 10 fer in Australia in 2008 to win the series, bowled the series tilting spell in 2012 in Australia. In the match, Clarke made 164, Steyn bowled a magical spell and took 4 wickets and it was one of the reason why Clarke's innings is rated so highly. In the recent Australian tour to SA, he wasn't very effective but won a match with his reverse swing bowling.
England is a tricky one because Steyn debuted against the English team and in your first series, you're going to be rubbish.. When he toured England in 2008, he didn't adjust to English conditions right away and it was a flat Load's pitch and he wasn't good on it.. Next match he took 7 wickets, reduced England to 221 in the first innings. He did his job and got injured and didn't play the next 2 matches. When England toured SA in 2010, Steyn didn't start the series because he was injured. He was rushed back in the 2nd test and wasn't bowling well. In the 3red test, he bowled amazingly but the scorecard won't show you that. It was the match when he bowled that spell to Collingwood and Bell.. (most English fans would remember).. and in the next match he stunned the England and won the match.
In the 2012 tour to England, he was the best bowler from both sides.. Mind you, Anderson usually bowls well in English conditions and he average 40 in that series. In the context, Steyn's average of 30 was very good, even though it was worse than his usual standard. Remember he took 15 wickets in those 3 tests and catalyst to SA winning the series. It was his first fully completed series against England.
England is a tricky one because Steyn debuted against the English team and in your first series, you're going to be rubbish.. When he toured England in 2008, he didn't adjust to English conditions right away and it was a flat Load's pitch and he wasn't good on it.. Next match he took 7 wickets, reduced England to 221 in the first innings. He did his job and got injured and didn't play the next 2 matches. When England toured SA in 2010, Steyn didn't start the series because he was injured. He was rushed back in the 2nd test and wasn't bowling well. In the 3red test, he bowled amazingly but the scorecard won't show you that. It was the match when he bowled that spell to Collingwood and Bell.. (most English fans would remember).. and in the next match he stunned the England and won the match.
In the 2012 tour to England, he was the best bowler from both sides.. Mind you, Anderson usually bowls well in English conditions and he average 40 in that series. In the context, Steyn's average of 30 was very good, even though it was worse than his usual standard. Remember he took 15 wickets in those 3 tests and catalyst to SA winning the series. It was his first fully completed series against England.
Wasim Akram was probably the most talented bowler since Marshall but I rate Steyn, McGrath, Ambrose, Donald etc ahead of him. No need to mention Marshall, Hadlee, Lillee etc.. those are given.
One of the major blots for Akram was that he was never rated no 1 in the rankings at any point in his career so it's kind of hard to make a case for him. He wasn't consistent. He bowled some really good balls among too many rubbish. He also relied too much on his magical bowls than on good plans. If only he had the brains of McGrath, he would have been the Bradmon of bowlers.
One of the major blots for Akram was that he was never rated no 1 in the rankings at any point in his career so it's kind of hard to make a case for him. He wasn't consistent. He bowled some really good balls among too many rubbish. He also relied too much on his magical bowls than on good plans. If only he had the brains of McGrath, he would have been the Bradmon of bowlers.
Hard to compare ODIs because it was easier for bowlers in the 90s than now.. now the batsmen are playing with bigger bats on smaller grounds, rules made to suit batsmen etc.. Wasim has never bowled to players like Gilly, AB or Dhoni or Warner etc type of most attacking players.. It's kind of hard to compare and he never played t20 so I can't just assume he would have been good in that format. Wasim's ODI record should be taken with grain of salt like most of the ODI batsmen these days. Lot of players average 40s nowadays and how many averaged 40 back in 90s with the bat?
Navdeep Srivastava
Local Club Regular
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2011
- Runs
- 1,311
Wasim was not rated number 1 because he was one of the most consistent bowler, between 1990 and 1997 when every atg was playing he was averaging 20 with ball best among the all bowlers playing.
His biggest hurdle was that Wasim was a left-hander and his reverse swing was always negated for right handed batsman. See how Zaheer use to struggle against right handers inspire of being one of the best reverse swing bowler.
Navdeep Srivastava
Local Club Regular
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2011
- Runs
- 1,311
Reason I think Steyn has got passed Wasim is because today every batsman fear Steyn, I have never seen Australia, South Africa, England change the nature of track because of Wasim but England, Australia even India is making sure that Steyn get nothing from pitch. See even UAE 2010 pitches has nothing . Now compare them to 2012 England series pitches, teams are literally changing the nature of pitch because of Steyn.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
I am back
See the context in which you mentioned support bowlers at first. Your point was that the way I am comparing the top 25 players of each era, I am doing that by considering the whole bowling attacks. Then I gave the data that bowling attacks overall effectiveness in both case isn't much different. This should have ended here.
Because Steyn having greater pull has nothing to do with the argument. Whatever pulls Steyn or Wasim have for their bowling attacks, they are included in the analysis because I am considering the whole bowling attacks including Steyn and Wasim.
An one more thing that I didn't mentioned in my analysis. Overall the 8 batsman I mention for Wasim and 13 for Steyn, the ones for Steyn have relatively more averages than those 8 in Wasim's case. I just compared the average of the batsman against their bowling attacks vs their overall averages during that period. Since overall average in Steyn era has increased, the batsman in Steyns case naturally have more averages. So in other words, that comparison already took into account the flat track theory of Steyn's time. (I may not have explained this point in best possible way, do ask if you don't understand)
And as I said, its not like we have to compare a bowler with Murali or Hadlee.
All an ATG bowler need is to just have an enough support from the other end, that don't leak the pressure build up by him. Steyn has much better support bowlers than that.
The first thing I mention in that post
http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...ss-of-Wasim-Akram/page8&p=7844742#post7844742
is that we have to look beyond raw stats to see the actual impact (I need to keep referring to this post, you better go through it once so we don't have to discuss redundant points).
You posted 6 screen shots when only 2 were enough to see the difference (since the first two also include the data of next 4).
Just in case, if you really want to make point of Steyn's pull for his bowling attack, yes it is greater than that of Wasim. But its not difficult to figure out why.
Wasim has to share his wickets wickets with two other ATG bowlers (Imran and Waqar), while Steyn was the only ATG in his bowling attack (with good support nonetheless). Thats why Steyn is bound to have more pull and more percentage of wickets among the bowling attack.
As I said earlier, since Steyn has more than decent support, this point should hardly matter. As a fact, I posted this screenie in another thread. Its shows the contribution of bowlers (of Australia), to their teams wickets.
See how far down the list are McGrath and Warne. Just because they play along each other doesn't make them lesser greats. Or that don't make Bruce Reid a superior bowler if he don't have same support as them.
I am aware that economy rate has been on rise. Again look at the post in previous page. I do mentioned that SR decrease and average increase for bowler is explained by rise in economy rates.
But SR decrease shows that its not as flat for bowlers in tests as it is made out to be. The patta logic holds good for ODI's, its very much balanced by batsmen lose techniques in test matches. You can't term every SC track as patta, in that case Wasim has bowled more on those. The decrease in SR shows that their is still enough for bowlers in the tracks to exploit. Steyn being only ATG bowler exploits it more than others, that what deludes him to look better than he actually is.
And its not like average will shoot up crazily if bowlers don't strike fast. The increase in economy is from 2.75 to 3.16 only. People forget that Wasim didn't played in stone age, he just retired a year before Steyn made his debut.
And Umesh Yadav is an extreme case. You know it as well, he tends to produce wicket taking balls, but dishes out rubbish in between. He has economy rate of 4.3 in tests even much higher that modern standards.
As for tail-enders, you can't take it away from Wasim. Current tail-enders maybe a little high on batting ability but importantly they score more because bowlers inability to bowl right length to them. You bowl like Wasim used to bowl, I don't expect them to fire. Rough them up with 2-3 bouncers and then fire a fast inswinging yorker at stumps while they still not set. Its game over for them. Wasim/Waqar ability to clean up the tail was phenomenal!
Bro...that actually strengthens Steyn's case even more bro.
Because of Steyn the gap is less bro. He pulls the entire lineup together. Of course he has a good support unit but nowhere close to what Wasim had for different conditions.
Here's why (see the gaps):
Pakistan bowler averages with Akram in team
View attachment 57515
SA bowler averages with Steyn in team
View attachment 57516
Pakistan bowler averages with Akram in team - AWAY RECORDS
View attachment 57518
SA bowler averages with Steyn in team - AWAY RECORDS
View attachment 57519
Pakistan bowler averages with Akram in team - OUTSIDE SC RECORDS
View attachment 57522
SA bowler averages with Steyn in team - ASIA RECORDS
View attachment 57521
See the gaps.
Steyn had a good support group (that too barring Morkel...others keep rotating in and out). Philander sample set is low and he is useless in flat tracks.
And Steyn does this in TODAY's era.
Simply simply phenomenal.
See the context in which you mentioned support bowlers at first. Your point was that the way I am comparing the top 25 players of each era, I am doing that by considering the whole bowling attacks. Then I gave the data that bowling attacks overall effectiveness in both case isn't much different. This should have ended here.
Because Steyn having greater pull has nothing to do with the argument. Whatever pulls Steyn or Wasim have for their bowling attacks, they are included in the analysis because I am considering the whole bowling attacks including Steyn and Wasim.
An one more thing that I didn't mentioned in my analysis. Overall the 8 batsman I mention for Wasim and 13 for Steyn, the ones for Steyn have relatively more averages than those 8 in Wasim's case. I just compared the average of the batsman against their bowling attacks vs their overall averages during that period. Since overall average in Steyn era has increased, the batsman in Steyns case naturally have more averages. So in other words, that comparison already took into account the flat track theory of Steyn's time. (I may not have explained this point in best possible way, do ask if you don't understand)
And as I said, its not like we have to compare a bowler with Murali or Hadlee.
All an ATG bowler need is to just have an enough support from the other end, that don't leak the pressure build up by him. Steyn has much better support bowlers than that.
The first thing I mention in that post
http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...ss-of-Wasim-Akram/page8&p=7844742#post7844742
is that we have to look beyond raw stats to see the actual impact (I need to keep referring to this post, you better go through it once so we don't have to discuss redundant points).
You posted 6 screen shots when only 2 were enough to see the difference (since the first two also include the data of next 4).
Just in case, if you really want to make point of Steyn's pull for his bowling attack, yes it is greater than that of Wasim. But its not difficult to figure out why.
Wasim has to share his wickets wickets with two other ATG bowlers (Imran and Waqar), while Steyn was the only ATG in his bowling attack (with good support nonetheless). Thats why Steyn is bound to have more pull and more percentage of wickets among the bowling attack.
As I said earlier, since Steyn has more than decent support, this point should hardly matter. As a fact, I posted this screenie in another thread. Its shows the contribution of bowlers (of Australia), to their teams wickets.
See how far down the list are McGrath and Warne. Just because they play along each other doesn't make them lesser greats. Or that don't make Bruce Reid a superior bowler if he don't have same support as them.
That is a very easily explainable phenomena.
In today's era, batsmen score fast hence average of bowlers are plumeting but SR is good cos many sometimes scoring fast can give you wickets and there is a lot of slogging towards the end too in order to force a result.
While faster scoring can give you wickets, the pitches make it HARD to get them.
That's why someone like Umesh averages 36 and has a SR of 51 (which is ATG stuff for SR).
In today's era, if you don't strike at a ridiculous rate, your average will shoot up like crazy. Hence most bowlers struggle.
Steyn gets batsmen out faster than anyone in tracks that favour batsmen. Take a look at every other bowler and they find it hard to get those wickets. Its hardly easy conditions to take wickets and ADD TO THAT FLAT TRACKS made to counter certain teams unlike the past.
Plus did we account for the fact that there are no easy tailender wickets in today's times unlike the 90s?
A bowler can't simply come and blow away the tail easily these days. He has to work for it big time.
I am aware that economy rate has been on rise. Again look at the post in previous page. I do mentioned that SR decrease and average increase for bowler is explained by rise in economy rates.
But SR decrease shows that its not as flat for bowlers in tests as it is made out to be. The patta logic holds good for ODI's, its very much balanced by batsmen lose techniques in test matches. You can't term every SC track as patta, in that case Wasim has bowled more on those. The decrease in SR shows that their is still enough for bowlers in the tracks to exploit. Steyn being only ATG bowler exploits it more than others, that what deludes him to look better than he actually is.
And its not like average will shoot up crazily if bowlers don't strike fast. The increase in economy is from 2.75 to 3.16 only. People forget that Wasim didn't played in stone age, he just retired a year before Steyn made his debut.
And Umesh Yadav is an extreme case. You know it as well, he tends to produce wicket taking balls, but dishes out rubbish in between. He has economy rate of 4.3 in tests even much higher that modern standards.
As for tail-enders, you can't take it away from Wasim. Current tail-enders maybe a little high on batting ability but importantly they score more because bowlers inability to bowl right length to them. You bowl like Wasim used to bowl, I don't expect them to fire. Rough them up with 2-3 bouncers and then fire a fast inswinging yorker at stumps while they still not set. Its game over for them. Wasim/Waqar ability to clean up the tail was phenomenal!
WrexEverything
Tape Ball Star
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2015
- Runs
- 913
Excellent post which actually provides context to series stats instead of looking at them in isolation.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
I am back
See the context in which you mentioned support bowlers at first. Your point was that the way I am comparing the top 25 players of each era, I am doing that by considering the whole bowling attacks. Then I gave the data that bowling attacks overall effectiveness in both case isn't much different. This should have ended here.
Because Steyn having greater pull has nothing to do with the argument. Whatever pulls Steyn or Wasim have for their bowling attacks, they are included in the analysis because I am considering the whole bowling attacks including Steyn and Wasim.
What? You are just repeating what you said in another way. Wasim had a stronger bowling attack that was well rounded and Steyn didn't. Steyn still did well. Stats show it. I don't see how anyone can dispute that after my post.
An one more thing that I didn't mentioned in my analysis. Overall the 8 batsman I mention for Wasim and 13 for Steyn, the ones for Steyn have relatively more averages than those 8 in Wasim's case. I just compared the average of the batsman against their bowling attacks vs their overall averages during that period. Since overall average in Steyn era has increased, the batsman in Steyns case naturally have more averages. So in other words, that comparison already took into account the flat track theory of Steyn's time. (I may not have explained this point in best possible way, do ask if you don't understand).
And as I said, its not like we have to compare a bowler with Murali or Hadlee.
All an ATG bowler need is to just have an enough support from the other end, that don't leak the pressure build up by him. Steyn has much better support bowlers than that.
The first thing I mention in that post
http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...ss-of-Wasim-Akram/page8&p=7844742#post7844742
is that we have to look beyond raw stats to see the actual impact (I need to keep referring to this post, you better go through it once so we don't have to discuss redundant points).
You posted 6 screen shots when only 2 were enough to see the difference (since the first two also include the data of next 4).
Just in case, if you really want to make point of Steyn's pull for his bowling attack, yes it is greater than that of Wasim. But its not difficult to figure out why.
Wasim has to share his wickets wickets with two other ATG bowlers (Imran and Waqar), while Steyn was the only ATG in his bowling attack (with good support nonetheless). Thats why Steyn is bound to have more pull and more percentage of wickets among the bowling attack. As I said earlier, since Steyn has more than decent support, this point should hardly matter. As a fact, I posted this screenie in another thread. Its shows the contribution of bowlers (of Australia), to their teams wickets.
I am very surprised with such arguments. I have posted about it 10,000 times in different threads.
When you ATG bowlers, your wickets will be lesser as you have to share them but your average will be better cos the batsmen who is troubling you will be taken out by another ATG. By pull, I was meaning average not wickets.
See how far down the list are McGrath and Warne. Just because they play along each other doesn't make them lesser greats. Or that don't make Bruce Reid a superior bowler if he don't have same support as them.
Of course, lesser support automatically doesn't mean better bowler. But STEYN DELIVERS results inspite of lesser support even in Asian conditions with no ATG bowler or good spinner. There is a world of difference between supplementary data which strengthens a case and primary data. You are assuming I am using Steyn's disparity stats ALONE to ascertain its supremacy. No I am not. Steyn has everything and on top of that he has the stats which was my point.
I am aware that economy rate has been on rise. Again look at the post in previous page. I do mentioned that SR decrease and average increase for bowler is explained by rise in economy rates.
But SR decrease shows that its not as flat for bowlers in tests as it is made out to be. The patta logic holds good for ODI's, its very much balanced by batsmen lose techniques in test matches. You can't term every SC track as patta, in that case Wasim has bowled more on those. The decrease in SR shows that their is still enough for bowlers in the tracks to exploit. Steyn being only ATG bowler exploits it more than others, that what deludes him to look better than he actually is.
And its not like average will shoot up crazily if bowlers don't strike fast. The increase in economy is from 2.75 to 3.16 only. People forget that Wasim didn't played in stone age, he just retired a year before Steyn made his debut.
And Umesh Yadav is an extreme case. You know it as well, he tends to produce wicket taking balls, but dishes out rubbish in between. He has economy rate of 4.3 in tests even much higher that modern standards.
Absolutely not. See this list. Everyone has awesome SR ATG level irrespective of their average.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
Steyn has to strike at a great SR to have 20s average or else it would shoot up.
As for tail-enders, you can't take it away from Wasim. Current tail-enders maybe a little high on batting ability but importantly they score more because bowlers inability to bowl right length to them. You bowl like Wasim used to bowl, I don't expect them to fire. Rough them up with 2-3 bouncers and then fire a fast inswinging yorker at stumps while they still not set. Its game over for them. Wasim/Waqar ability to clean up the tail was phenomenal!
You are disputing even this.
Bold
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Don't think I have repeated anything. You made the point of Steyn's pull in wrong context. I just clarified that and cleared the Steyn pull logic in the next argument. The context was the bowling attacks which include Steyn and Wasim as well. Whether Steyn having greater or lesser pull, that pull is included the the bowling attack. And the top 25 batsman I mentioned have faced the bowling attacks including Steyn and Wasim, that means that they already have faced that pull.
Don't know about 10000 times but let me analyze your logic.
You say that average will be better because another ATG will take out the batsman troubling. But you didn't mention that another ATG bowler in the team will have his own pull, that will lower down the overall average of the team. Thus the average difference shouldn't be greater. It actually should be greater in Steyn's case (which it is), because along with him getting most percentage of wickets, other bowlers don't have their own pull.
See the Warne's average in the table. Despite having McGrath in the team, his average difference from the overall bowling attack is only 1.7. Wasim's average difference is actually greater than both McGrath and Warne. And see, Bruce Reid has even more average difference than Steyn, doesn't make him better bowler.
No, I am not assuming anything. We are comparing 2 ATG's so we have to talk about finer points. It started from you saying that Steyn has lesser bowling support, I mentioned he has more than enough support. Then you talked about Steyn's pull and I explained why did Steyn has greater pull for his bowling attack.
No doubt Steyn has taken wickets in Asia without an ATG support. But so has Wasim.
Wasim averages 24.7 without bowling with Imran and Waqar, hardly a case to make out of.
Keep it generic dude. Steyn debuted in 2004, has got many wickets before that sample taken by you. We are comparing greats here with 350+ wickets and see the list yourself. Most of them having less than 100 wickets. If we start counting every such bowler, we will end up having hundreds of ATG bowlers. You are comparing the stats o these bowlers in limited time with those of ATG's over a coarse of period of more than a decade including all the ups and downs of their era. Take the data from Steyn 's debut and put some restriction on the number of wickets have have a significant sample size and then see the result. (Even the list you have listed, see the economy rate of Yadav, way above any other, proves that he is extreme case)
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...4;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
Only 7 bowlers, all very fine ones with only two have SR less than 50.
Don't do this. Don't kill the argument by saying that ask any neutral. I am comparing world greats and trying to be neutral. If you feel I am being biased, there wasn't any point of whole discussion.
See I mentioned that tail-enders ability is slightly better these days, but they are look to be even better by the current bowlers inability to bowl right length to them. Wasim may have got them slightly more expensive but thats all. I don't see anyone taking it away Wasim's ability to wrap up the tail.
Just a request, advice or suggestion (whatever you assume it). When posting a comment in general, you can argue the group of people being biased, but don't do this when you are having one on one debate with someone. I never taunt any Indian poster being biased when we are discussing Sachin, Dravid or Gavasker when I am having discussion with one of them.
Having said that, I am yet to see any convincing counter-argument. Since I have analyzed both of them yesterday, there is no new argument being posted in this thread that I haven't thought of. Of course, I am posting very limited portion of what I am thinking, but that doesn't mean that I haven't analyzed both in detail.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Don't think I have repeated anything. You made the point of Steyn's pull in wrong context. I just clarified that and cleared the Steyn pull logic in the next argument. The context was the bowling attacks which include Steyn and Wasim as well. Whether Steyn having greater or lesser pull, that pull is included the the bowling attack. And the top 25 batsman I mentioned have faced the bowling attacks including Steyn and Wasim, that means that they already have faced that pull.
First of all bro, I wasn't being rude or even had the slightest intention to be rude. So don't take it the wrong way.
Yes....everything is included in bowling attacks. That's obvious. What's there to dispute about that? The dispute is about impact of Steyn/Akram with/without their bowling attacks.
Don't know about 10000 times but let me analyze your logic.
You say that average will be better because another ATG will take out the batsman troubling. But you didn't mention that another ATG bowler in the team will have his own pull, that will lower down the overall average of the team. Thus the average difference shouldn't be greater. It actually should be greater in Steyn's case (which it is), because along with him getting most percentage of wickets, other bowlers don't have their own pull.
Yes...that's the point. Steyn's gap is big cos others aren't as good. But in the end, the output is the same and I posted stats in different situations (home, away, in Asia) to show how Steyn's average compensates for the rest.
Plus another factor that stats don't show is Steyn gets those crucial series defining spells which tilt the favour towards his side and he does it with shocking regularity. Even when he was carted by us In Joberg, he came back with a series winning spell in Durban. Of course,. ABD and Faf efforts in Joberg mattered but point is no matter what he comes and changes the course of a match or series. Its happened too many times for anyone to ignore.
See the Warne's average in the table. Despite having McGrath in the team, his average difference from the overall bowling attack is only 1.7. Wasim's average difference is actually greater than both McGrath and Warne. And see, Bruce Reid has even more average difference than Steyn, doesn't make him better bowler.
I already answered this in the last post but unfortunately you are sticking to your point repeating the same words.
Here's what I said: Of course, lesser support automatically doesn't mean better bowler. But STEYN DELIVERS results inspite of lesser support even in Asian conditions with no ATG bowler or good spinner. There is a world of difference between supplementary data which strengthens a case and primary data. You are assuming I am using Steyn's disparity stats ALONE to ascertain its supremacy. No I am not. Steyn has everything and on top of that he has the stats which was my point.
No, I am not assuming anything. We are comparing 2 ATG's so we have to talk about finer points. It started from you saying that Steyn has lesser bowling support, I mentioned he has more than enough support. Then you talked about Steyn's pull and I explained why did Steyn has greater pull for his bowling attack. No doubt Steyn has taken wickets in Asia without an ATG support. But so has Wasim.
Wasim averages 24.7 without bowling with Imran and Waqar, hardly a case to make out of.
I clearly referred to pull as average which I think you missed out. Do see the stats I posted and see the impact of Steyn. Of course, he has better numbers than other SA bowlers but bowling is all about hunting in packs and Steyn does phenomenally well even without ATG bowlers. We can't explain away the disparity of his results as "he is better than others so he got it...other than that no difference".. Yes there is a difference and a HUGE one. Its all about effectiveness of attack. When Sachin averaged 80 in 2010 SA tour, Steyn averaged 17. He got Sachin out a few times. If a guy like Saqlain or Imran or Waqar got Sachin out, the partnerhips Sachin had would not be there and Steyn may havfe averaged even 15 or 14. This is just one example of how ATG partners impact your results.
Now coming to Akram. How many games did he play without Waqar or Imran or Saqlain? Or just Waqar and Imran?
Keep it generic dude. Steyn debuted in 2004, has got many wickets before that sample taken by you. We are comparing greats here with 350+ wickets and see the list yourself. Most of them having less than 100 wickets. If we start counting every such bowler, we will end up having hundreds of ATG bowlers. You are comparing the stats o these bowlers in limited time with those of ATG's over a coarse of period of more than a decade including all the ups and downs of their era. Take the data from Steyn 's debut and put some restriction on the number of wickets have have a significant sample size and then see the result. (Even the list you have listed, see the economy rate of Yadav, way above any other, proves that he is extreme case)
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...4;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
Only 7 bowlers, all very fine ones with only two have SR less than 50.
You are missing the point bro. Sample set is important but my point wasn't that. Even mediocre bowlers of todays times get good SR and sooner or later, they get found out and get thrown out, hence they don't last long to take 200-300 wickets. In today's era, lots of bowlers have good SR but you need to have that to have a good average. Even those with 50-60 SR
Bishen Singh Bedi is considered as a supreme spinners at a tier below ATgs. And his SR was 80.
All the people in your link have SR between 50-60 which is ATG stuff. Amrbose SR is 54 but his average is 20. McGrath is 51 and hi average is 21. Wasim SR is 54 and his average is 23. Now see the list you just posted.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...4;spanval1=span;template=results;type=bowling
Ntini, Johnson, Zaheer, Morkel, Broad, Anderson - none of them ATG but all have ATG SR.
Which simply proves my point that you have to strike at a ridiculous SR nowadays to have a good average.
I hope we don't have to discuss this after so much data being given out.
Don't do this. Don't kill the argument by saying that ask any neutral. I am comparing world greats and trying to be neutral. If you feel I am being biased, there wasn't any point of whole discussion.
See I mentioned that tail-enders ability is slightly better these days, but they are look to be even better by the current bowlers inability to bowl right length to them. Wasim may have got them slightly more expensive but thats all. I don't see anyone taking it away Wasim's ability to wrap up the tail.
Just a request, advice or suggestion (whatever you assume it). When posting a comment in general, you can argue the group of people being biased, but don't do this when you are having one on one debate with someone. I never taunt any Indian poster being biased when we are discussing Sachin, Dravid or Gavasker when I am having discussion with one of them.
Don't take it the wrong way. Never accused of you being biased. I am just saying in heat of argument, you may miss it (I could too...its just a human thing). But do ask anyone other than Indian, Pakistani and SA and see their response about toughness of taking wickets against tailenders nowadays compared to past.
Having said that, I am yet to see any convincing counter-argument. Since I have analyzed both of them yesterday, there is no new argument being posted in this thread that I haven't thought of. Of course, I am posting very limited portion of what I am thinking, but that doesn't mean that I haven't analyzed both in detail.
Basically:
1. Pitches got harder - SR of decent support bowlers got to ATG levels so you need to strike at a ridiculous rate to get good average
2. Tailenders can bat (No 8 and No 9) and even No 10 and No 11 do practice blocking deliveries.
3. Every cricinfo expert who rated Wasim in World XI (which you said you will give more preference to) SAY that bowling conditions are becoming PATHETIC. Not one says its easier/same to get wickets in this era because of weaker techniques, hacks, etc. Not one.
4. When tracks get flatter, gap between FTBs and quality batsmen reduce. Mediocre batsmen will easily get out to quality bowlers but other batsmen will not due to pitch conditions.
5. Relaxed rules towards preparation of ball (do Google Martin Crowe's cricinfo article on facing Pakistan in Pakistan and what NZ found when they tried some of the stuff)
6. No ATG bowlers or great spinners for Steyn
Every factor points towards Steyn except for the skill set, entertainment, charisma and joy but you say you haven't found any convincing arguments (for Test matches).
Well...I beg to disagree.
Bold
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
The gap between Akram's attack and Steyn's is low because Steyn pulls his bowling lineup.
To prove that, I posted stats to show disparity (in different conditions).
Don't take it the other way round that Steyn's disparity with other SA bowlers is high so he is better.
That's sooooo not my point.
To prove that, I posted stats to show disparity (in different conditions).
Don't take it the other way round that Steyn's disparity with other SA bowlers is high so he is better.
That's sooooo not my point.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
You are feeling that I am missing your points while I am feeling the same about you.
True that Steyn has lesser support and he is producing same output. But dude, you are seriously under-rating the support Steyn has got. Pollock averages less than Waqar and Philander averages less than Imran (although Waqar and Imran being better bowlers). Yes Waqar has played more with Wasim than Pollock has with Steyn. But you are still under-rating the support bowlers in Steyn's case.
The support bowling argument holds good in cases like Hadlee or Murali, where you have trundlers at other end leaking out all the pressure you are building from one end.
The 6 screenshots you posted, the bowlers averages home and away from their from their career averages so we don't need to break up that much to analyze what how these bowlers have performed (Philander's away average though 4 units greater than his career average is compensated somewhat by Morkel averaging 2 units lesser).
Let me sum this up. Yes, overall Wasim has got better support bowlers than Steyn, but to me, the difference in support is not as much significant that we consider it to be a tie-breaker between both though by going through your posts, I think you do feel that difference to be a major factor.
True, he has done that. But so has Wasim. Give them equal marks for that. Don't bring in bowling support factor here since I have already covered that and given more marks to Steyn for that.
I didn't miss out anything. I just repeated my argument since to me you were repeating yours.
Again you are mentioning Sachin's case in that series (which I incidentally know). While comparing that 25 batsman against the bowling attacks of Steyn and Wasim, I clearly said that this is not the most accurate method of how top players have performed against these bowlers. But since I can't get more refined data, this is the most optimum way to judge that. Inaccuracies and anomalies would be there, but if you have got any better idea to judge how top players have performed against Steyn and Wasim, plz share it. Again, you tend to bring bowling support point in every argument which you think is more significant as I do, there is no need to bring it up here since I have already finalized that.
And those were 11 matches in which Wasim averages 24.7 without Imran and Waqar. Maybe a little sample size, but thats all we have got and we have to form an opinion on this. Just like Steyn, Wasim was a good enough bowler even without ATG support (Imran actually wasn't same ATG bowler post 87 but lets ignore this for once).
Exactly that proves my point. Since SR are lesser in modern era, proves the point of technical inability of batsman to occupy crease for longer periods specially in helpful conditions. And Steyn having lesser SR is actually following of this trend, was it the case of bowlers SR increasing in current era and Steyn still having lesser SR, I would have given that to Steyn.
So why do you need to ask any neutral when I am accepting it that tail-enders are better in modern game. See my last two posts. But I do think that they are made to look better than they actually are because of incapable bowlers as well. You can't discount amazing ability of Wasim for bundling out tail for that. He may have find it harder to get out modern day tail enders but he would be much better in doing that than current bowlers even Steyn, thats my point.
1) Modern Day game is drifted towards lower SR and greater economies. Every bowler is getting wickets at lower SR and so is Steyn. Can't give Steyn any marks for this.
2) True they can bat, but bowlers are less skillful in getting them out as well. I think Wasim would have done better than Steyn if they are to bowl tail-enders of similar calibre and under similar conditions.
3) Experts say that conditions are getting worse for bowling . True, but more for LOI's than for tests. Experts don't even say that modern day batsmen techniques are better than those of past. Though their striking ability, range and power of shots and ability to score heavily on tracks that suits them has increased, most of these things are more relevant to LOI's than to tests.
That expert argument came in when I was comparing a layman with an expert. If you are going to take everything what experts say, its the end of thread, they all pick Wasim in all time XI. That bowling conditions becoming pathetic is an over-rated factor (for Tests only) and I have proved many times in this thread.
4) True. Thats why Steyn couldn't break 600+ partnership (including FTB Jaya), couldn't stop Sehwag (FTB) from scoring 300, couldn't prevent Clarke (significantly better average at home) scoring two back to back double tons, Flemming, Chanderpaul, Kohli-Pujara, Pietersen and so on. Steyn failing on such occasions suggest his inability to take wickets even against FTB's on flat tracks, when they get set.
5) Thats why I am not bringing the point of Wasim bowling mostly in Asia (less helpful conditions for fast bowling) while Steyn has bowled most of his overs in better conditions for fast bowling (17 matches in Asia). Though he has done well in those 17 matches, but you never know, if he would have bowled most of his career in Asia against modern day FTB's, against the tighter rules for ball conditioning, I seriously doubt he would have ended up with similar record as he has now.
That ball preparation stuff is balanced by the fact that Wasim has played most of his cricket in SC.
6) Again that ATG support stuff, give Steyn more weight for that than Wasim.
Now see what you are ignoring.
1) Neutral umpires (Wasim could twice have won Pakistan a series in WI had there been neutral umpires in his era)
2) Ability to get batsman out at any stage of the game
3) Performance of best players of the era against them (although that method by which compared top 25 batsman might be slightly inaccurate, that gives us a reasonable idea how best players have performed against them). For that matter, many great players Ganguly, Ponting, Lara etc rate Wasim best fast bowler having seen ( and some of them even faced) Steyn as well. And I rate this factor on the top of anyone, since Steyn's record is highly influenced by batsman with fake averages (Hafeez, Rohit, Dilshan), so how only the best batsman have performed against them is worth noting.
4) Frequent rate of batting collapses. Most of them in SA where Steyn bowls most. Three sub-50 totals in 18 months is ridiculous. And you couldn't argue that Steyn is inducing all this collapses, since even Philander is getting 5-er under these conditions against such batsman.
5) Inability of modern batsman to survive in helpful conditions (on which Steyn has played most of his career). Even quality batsman of modern day like Kohli and Pujara struggle against moving ball.
6) Percentage of dropped catches.
Steyn dismissals caught > 63%
Wasim dismissals caught <47%
Again not suggesting that Wasim's percentage would have been as high as Steyn had all his catches been taken, but you can see how good fielding unit opens impacts on your mode of dismissals.
P.S. don't write your stuff in my post plz. Its difficult for me to quote you then.
True that Steyn has lesser support and he is producing same output. But dude, you are seriously under-rating the support Steyn has got. Pollock averages less than Waqar and Philander averages less than Imran (although Waqar and Imran being better bowlers). Yes Waqar has played more with Wasim than Pollock has with Steyn. But you are still under-rating the support bowlers in Steyn's case.
The support bowling argument holds good in cases like Hadlee or Murali, where you have trundlers at other end leaking out all the pressure you are building from one end.
The 6 screenshots you posted, the bowlers averages home and away from their from their career averages so we don't need to break up that much to analyze what how these bowlers have performed (Philander's away average though 4 units greater than his career average is compensated somewhat by Morkel averaging 2 units lesser).
Let me sum this up. Yes, overall Wasim has got better support bowlers than Steyn, but to me, the difference in support is not as much significant that we consider it to be a tie-breaker between both though by going through your posts, I think you do feel that difference to be a major factor.
True, he has done that. But so has Wasim. Give them equal marks for that. Don't bring in bowling support factor here since I have already covered that and given more marks to Steyn for that.
I didn't miss out anything. I just repeated my argument since to me you were repeating yours.
Again you are mentioning Sachin's case in that series (which I incidentally know). While comparing that 25 batsman against the bowling attacks of Steyn and Wasim, I clearly said that this is not the most accurate method of how top players have performed against these bowlers. But since I can't get more refined data, this is the most optimum way to judge that. Inaccuracies and anomalies would be there, but if you have got any better idea to judge how top players have performed against Steyn and Wasim, plz share it. Again, you tend to bring bowling support point in every argument which you think is more significant as I do, there is no need to bring it up here since I have already finalized that.
And those were 11 matches in which Wasim averages 24.7 without Imran and Waqar. Maybe a little sample size, but thats all we have got and we have to form an opinion on this. Just like Steyn, Wasim was a good enough bowler even without ATG support (Imran actually wasn't same ATG bowler post 87 but lets ignore this for once).
Exactly that proves my point. Since SR are lesser in modern era, proves the point of technical inability of batsman to occupy crease for longer periods specially in helpful conditions. And Steyn having lesser SR is actually following of this trend, was it the case of bowlers SR increasing in current era and Steyn still having lesser SR, I would have given that to Steyn.
So why do you need to ask any neutral when I am accepting it that tail-enders are better in modern game. See my last two posts. But I do think that they are made to look better than they actually are because of incapable bowlers as well. You can't discount amazing ability of Wasim for bundling out tail for that. He may have find it harder to get out modern day tail enders but he would be much better in doing that than current bowlers even Steyn, thats my point.
1) Modern Day game is drifted towards lower SR and greater economies. Every bowler is getting wickets at lower SR and so is Steyn. Can't give Steyn any marks for this.
2) True they can bat, but bowlers are less skillful in getting them out as well. I think Wasim would have done better than Steyn if they are to bowl tail-enders of similar calibre and under similar conditions.
3) Experts say that conditions are getting worse for bowling . True, but more for LOI's than for tests. Experts don't even say that modern day batsmen techniques are better than those of past. Though their striking ability, range and power of shots and ability to score heavily on tracks that suits them has increased, most of these things are more relevant to LOI's than to tests.
That expert argument came in when I was comparing a layman with an expert. If you are going to take everything what experts say, its the end of thread, they all pick Wasim in all time XI. That bowling conditions becoming pathetic is an over-rated factor (for Tests only) and I have proved many times in this thread.
4) True. Thats why Steyn couldn't break 600+ partnership (including FTB Jaya), couldn't stop Sehwag (FTB) from scoring 300, couldn't prevent Clarke (significantly better average at home) scoring two back to back double tons, Flemming, Chanderpaul, Kohli-Pujara, Pietersen and so on. Steyn failing on such occasions suggest his inability to take wickets even against FTB's on flat tracks, when they get set.
5) Thats why I am not bringing the point of Wasim bowling mostly in Asia (less helpful conditions for fast bowling) while Steyn has bowled most of his overs in better conditions for fast bowling (17 matches in Asia). Though he has done well in those 17 matches, but you never know, if he would have bowled most of his career in Asia against modern day FTB's, against the tighter rules for ball conditioning, I seriously doubt he would have ended up with similar record as he has now.
That ball preparation stuff is balanced by the fact that Wasim has played most of his cricket in SC.
6) Again that ATG support stuff, give Steyn more weight for that than Wasim.
Now see what you are ignoring.
1) Neutral umpires (Wasim could twice have won Pakistan a series in WI had there been neutral umpires in his era)
2) Ability to get batsman out at any stage of the game
3) Performance of best players of the era against them (although that method by which compared top 25 batsman might be slightly inaccurate, that gives us a reasonable idea how best players have performed against them). For that matter, many great players Ganguly, Ponting, Lara etc rate Wasim best fast bowler having seen ( and some of them even faced) Steyn as well. And I rate this factor on the top of anyone, since Steyn's record is highly influenced by batsman with fake averages (Hafeez, Rohit, Dilshan), so how only the best batsman have performed against them is worth noting.
4) Frequent rate of batting collapses. Most of them in SA where Steyn bowls most. Three sub-50 totals in 18 months is ridiculous. And you couldn't argue that Steyn is inducing all this collapses, since even Philander is getting 5-er under these conditions against such batsman.
5) Inability of modern batsman to survive in helpful conditions (on which Steyn has played most of his career). Even quality batsman of modern day like Kohli and Pujara struggle against moving ball.
6) Percentage of dropped catches.
Steyn dismissals caught > 63%
Wasim dismissals caught <47%
Again not suggesting that Wasim's percentage would have been as high as Steyn had all his catches been taken, but you can see how good fielding unit opens impacts on your mode of dismissals.
P.S. don't write your stuff in my post plz. Its difficult for me to quote you then.
Last edited:
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
The 6 screenshots you posted, the bowlers averages home and away from their from their career averages so we don't need to break up that much to analyze what how these bowlers have performed (Philander's away average though 4 units greater than his career average is compensated somewhat by Morkel averaging 2 units lesser).
I mean, bowlers averaging home and away is similar to their career averages apart from Philander averaging 4 more runs away.
I mean, bowlers averaging home and away is similar to their career averages apart from Philander averaging 4 more runs away.
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Since you and many of us admit that Wasim is more skillful than Steyn, imagine Wasim replacing Steyn. He would have to bowl more on helpful tracks (SA better place for fast bowling than Asia) against batsman inept to cope with quality bowling. Even with lesser support, if he is more skillful, he is more likely to end up with superior figures.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
A few simple points:
1. Support bowling was one of the factors. It wasn't a deal breaker or final decider. its just one of the many factors and I do agree that its not as important (in final decision) cos Steyn had good support bowlers too (atleast outside of Asia). That point was raised to talk about your averages of 25 batsmen vs various bowling attacks. I don't agree with that argument due to difference in quality of attack with respect to conditions and hence and I brought in this topic.
Its like you make a point and I make a counter point for that and you ASSUME that my counter point is my main weapon to say Steyn is greater than Wasim. I assure you its not. Its just a counter point to that analysis where I don't agree with you.
2. If you genuinely think that just bcos SR is low in this era, a GREAT bowler gets wickets easily, I complete and utterly disagree with it. I have explained about the impact of FTBs on easier tracks and how hard it gets to get good batsmen out on easy tracks. Add to that, the relaxed rules of ball preparation.
The ball preparation stuff is hardly balanced by the fact that Wasim played most of the games in SC. And there's some undeniable proofs for that. Here's an example:
Why did Akram average 19 at home against the top 4 sides of his era on Pakistan flat patta tracks but average 26 against the same sides in favourable bowling friendly conditions?
Yes....reverse swing and ball preparation had a decent role to play in it. Of course, Wasim was good EVEN WITHOUT IT but we can't deny the impact of that aspect. Steyn too has had the advantages of illegal preparation (Faf zip gate, etc) and whenever he had that advantage, HE SIMPLY RAN THROUGH ATTACKS in SC just as easily.
He too averages 22 with a ridiculous SR in Asia and UNLIKE Wasim, he didn't have a Saqlain or Imran or Waqar to get wickets at home at that rate. He had good support bowlers but no great spinners for Asia.
So its ball preparation - games in SC are SO NOT neutralized cos Steyn too got results against FTBs and all batsmen who were great at home.
Martin Crowe's cricinfo article explains this in a much much more deeper way.
However when we take away records against top sides, both are same and Steyn does it in this era. Now you are basically saying that's due to weaker batting but its just a hypothesis (its not proven). But what's PROVEN is England preparing flatter tracks to face Steyn in 2012 and horrible Aussie tracks in 2013.
Neutral umpires is a valid point cos Wasim had to deal with biased umpires when playing away unlike Steyn (who in turn had to deal with garbage pitches in England and Aus). I agree. How many of Wasim's wickets were denied I don't know but yeah Pakistan could have won a series in WI if not for the umpire.
3. The Steyn's caught % vs Wasim's is another argument I don't agree with because Steyn is an outswing bowler is DEPENDENT on slips to get wickets. Wasim is a different kind of bowler. Yes, he had to deal with drop catches and I definitely give him points for that. No doubt about it..
But to directly compare catch % is not right. If you say if Steyn was a Pakistani, he would have struggled because of bad slip catching, I would completely agree with you.
4. Wasim was better at breaking partnerships and being more tough but Steyn simply got the wickets and triggered collapses when in zone and he used to do that often and got results. Glenn McGrath may not be equal to Wasim in skills but in tests, he was a superior bowler according to many. Steyn is similar to that. Glenn Vs Steyn is something I have to think about.
Anyways...the discussion has reached a redundant point now. It was fine while it lasted.
I am not convinced with your arguments bro and I think you are not convinced with mine. Fair enough.
I am all for context but this isn't cutting it for me since Steyn has countless things in his favour compared to Wasim's and I can't rule all of that out with simple hypothesis that its easier to get wickets in today's era if you are a great bowler.
Maybe Wasim is a better test bowler (maybe though I doubt it) but these kinda stats don't do for me.
Anyways, let's agree to disagree.
1. Support bowling was one of the factors. It wasn't a deal breaker or final decider. its just one of the many factors and I do agree that its not as important (in final decision) cos Steyn had good support bowlers too (atleast outside of Asia). That point was raised to talk about your averages of 25 batsmen vs various bowling attacks. I don't agree with that argument due to difference in quality of attack with respect to conditions and hence and I brought in this topic.
Its like you make a point and I make a counter point for that and you ASSUME that my counter point is my main weapon to say Steyn is greater than Wasim. I assure you its not. Its just a counter point to that analysis where I don't agree with you.
2. If you genuinely think that just bcos SR is low in this era, a GREAT bowler gets wickets easily, I complete and utterly disagree with it. I have explained about the impact of FTBs on easier tracks and how hard it gets to get good batsmen out on easy tracks. Add to that, the relaxed rules of ball preparation.
The ball preparation stuff is hardly balanced by the fact that Wasim played most of the games in SC. And there's some undeniable proofs for that. Here's an example:
Why did Akram average 19 at home against the top 4 sides of his era on Pakistan flat patta tracks but average 26 against the same sides in favourable bowling friendly conditions?
Yes....reverse swing and ball preparation had a decent role to play in it. Of course, Wasim was good EVEN WITHOUT IT but we can't deny the impact of that aspect. Steyn too has had the advantages of illegal preparation (Faf zip gate, etc) and whenever he had that advantage, HE SIMPLY RAN THROUGH ATTACKS in SC just as easily.
He too averages 22 with a ridiculous SR in Asia and UNLIKE Wasim, he didn't have a Saqlain or Imran or Waqar to get wickets at home at that rate. He had good support bowlers but no great spinners for Asia.
So its ball preparation - games in SC are SO NOT neutralized cos Steyn too got results against FTBs and all batsmen who were great at home.
Martin Crowe's cricinfo article explains this in a much much more deeper way.
However when we take away records against top sides, both are same and Steyn does it in this era. Now you are basically saying that's due to weaker batting but its just a hypothesis (its not proven). But what's PROVEN is England preparing flatter tracks to face Steyn in 2012 and horrible Aussie tracks in 2013.
Neutral umpires is a valid point cos Wasim had to deal with biased umpires when playing away unlike Steyn (who in turn had to deal with garbage pitches in England and Aus). I agree. How many of Wasim's wickets were denied I don't know but yeah Pakistan could have won a series in WI if not for the umpire.
3. The Steyn's caught % vs Wasim's is another argument I don't agree with because Steyn is an outswing bowler is DEPENDENT on slips to get wickets. Wasim is a different kind of bowler. Yes, he had to deal with drop catches and I definitely give him points for that. No doubt about it..
But to directly compare catch % is not right. If you say if Steyn was a Pakistani, he would have struggled because of bad slip catching, I would completely agree with you.
4. Wasim was better at breaking partnerships and being more tough but Steyn simply got the wickets and triggered collapses when in zone and he used to do that often and got results. Glenn McGrath may not be equal to Wasim in skills but in tests, he was a superior bowler according to many. Steyn is similar to that. Glenn Vs Steyn is something I have to think about.
Anyways...the discussion has reached a redundant point now. It was fine while it lasted.
I am not convinced with your arguments bro and I think you are not convinced with mine. Fair enough.
I am all for context but this isn't cutting it for me since Steyn has countless things in his favour compared to Wasim's and I can't rule all of that out with simple hypothesis that its easier to get wickets in today's era if you are a great bowler.
Maybe Wasim is a better test bowler (maybe though I doubt it) but these kinda stats don't do for me.
Anyways, let's agree to disagree.
Ace78
Debutant
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2015
- Runs
- 87
Not sure about greatness but always enjoyed watching Wasim more. He looked magician with the ball.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Figures aren't everything.
Dravid averages 52 and so dos Ponting but the latter is a league above the former.
How you get the figures, what context, how much you impact the game (bowlers can do it in a better way than batsmen which is why Kumble won more games for us than Lara, Sachin - but they are ATG while Kumble is not). Not saying final results are everything cos Wasim had to deal with
There was once a thread about how Wasim-Waqar would fare against a team defending 150 on a tough track vs Ambrose-Walsh.
Everyone said Wasim-Waqar would do better.
A poster posted stats to show that in reality Ambrose-Walsh did better.
There is a world of difference between quality of a bowler and final ouput.
And nothing states that better than comparing guys like Steyn, McGrath to Wasim (who is far far far more superior to them in skills but the output and the impact wasn't as much).
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
By catch % I wasn't referring to the drop catches part but the analysis you did about dismissals via being caughts vs lbw, etc.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Stallion__
First Class Star
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Runs
- 3,477
- Post of the Week
- 2
Well if that was the case, I think it should have stopped that in post 690 when I said that.
I repeatedly said that its not the most accurate method, it just gives the rough idea. But since then, you have focused so much of bowling support, that it felt like you are using that as breaking point between two.
You are repeatedly missing this point. I agreed that its tough to get FTB's out on easy tracks but Steyn has actually failed in doing so. Don't make me repeat those incidents again. Go through previous posts.
Familiarity with the conditions dude. No doubt conditions in SC are tougher, but eventually you develop skills to to cope in such conditions. Wasim once told in an interview, that even that bounce in Australia assists pacers, SC pacers tend to struggle there. During his early tours to Aus, he got carried away with that bounce, and kept balling short, without realizing that Aussies are grown up playing such lengths. It takes time to adjust to those conditions, no matter if they support you.
You can't say if Wasim had born in SA and played there mostly, he would still ended up with an average of 26. He would known that conditions better and had bowled better there.
Again don't need to bring in bowling support factor, and yes, give marks to Steyn for adopting to SC conditions.
But you do need to realize, that Wasim and Waqar used to swing same ball which Aaqib Javed couldn't manage to do. If you are unable to prepare ball in SC, you wouldn't achieve 19 average.
That was more of an effect than a cause. A bowler balling in SC need to get ball prepared to achieve some results otherwise there is no hope of surviving. The cause was conditions and the effect was ball preparing. Had there been no cause, there would have been no effect. Thats how I am balancing these two factors.
Of course its not a direct relation as I mentioned before (you make me feel that in an eagerness to reply, you miss some important points in my post). I clearly mentioned, that posting percentages don't mean that Wasim would have got that many wickets caught had all his catches been taken.
But Wasim himself has mentioned it multiple times, that he has to rely more on inswing than outswing just because of fielders inability to hold on to catches. I totally agree, Wasim developed the methods to take wickets without the help of fielders, but that was more of a case of him being forced to do that rather that him doing it by choice. He would definitely loved to bowl more outswingers had he trusted his fielders.
The percentages just show that how much Steyn has benefited from those fielders. You simply can't deny the 'hole in the hands' of Pakistani fielders effect.
4. Wasim was better at breaking partnerships and being more tough but Steyn simply got the wickets and triggered collapses when in zone and he used to do that often and got results. Glenn McGrath may not be equal to Wasim in skills but in tests, he was a superior bowler according to many. Steyn is similar to that. Glenn Vs Steyn is something I have to think about.
Anyways...the discussion has reached a redundant point now. It was fine while it lasted.
I am not convinced with your arguments bro and I think you are not convinced with mine. Fair enough.
I am all for context but this isn't cutting it for me since Steyn has countless things in his favour compared to Wasim's and I can't rule all of that out with simple hypothesis that its easier to get wickets in today's era if you are a great bowler.
Maybe Wasim is a better test bowler (maybe though I doubt it) but these kinda stats don't do for me.
Anyways, let's agree to disagree.
I am actually one of thise who rate McGrath better than Wasim just because overall he has achieved more than Wasim despite Wasim being more skillful. But for Steyn, I have to say that he hasn't achieved that much for me to balance out Wasim's skill factor.
Since I am not convinced him being better than Wasim, no way I could compare him with McGrath. A more fair comparison would be Steyn vs Waqar, because Waqar was similar to Steyn is respect to blowing hot and cold (though I believe Steyn would come out winner in that case but thats a better comparison).
Even I am not ruling out those things that Steyn has in comparison to Wasim. Ofc you have your own way of judging players, while you keep referring to the 'batsman inability' as my hypothesis, you haven't come close to give a point which would deny that hypothesis.
Anyways surely, we could end it here if you want. I feel like you are not thinking out of the box (you probably think the same about me). Ofc I would have loved one of us to get convinced to other so all this discussion would have more meaning, for the second time, that didn't happen.
Maybe that stats don't work for you, but I myself is more that convinced that heavy share of Steyn's wickets are because to poor batsmanship unlike Wasim. The quality of batsman increases, Steyn's wicket-taking ability deteriorates far more than Wasim.
Anyhow, cheers mate. Maybe we end up third time lucky
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Well if that was the case, I think it should have stopped that in post 690 when I said that.
I repeatedly said that its not the most accurate method, it just gives the rough idea. But since then, you have focused so much of bowling support, that it felt like you are using that as breaking point between two.
You are repeatedly missing this point. I agreed that its tough to get FTB's out on easy tracks but Steyn has actually failed in doing so. Don't make me repeat those incidents again. Go through previous posts.
Familiarity with the conditions dude. No doubt conditions in SC are tougher, but eventually you develop skills to to cope in such conditions. Wasim once told in an interview, that even that bounce in Australia assists pacers, SC pacers tend to struggle there. During his early tours to Aus, he got carried away with that bounce, and kept balling short, without realizing that Aussies are grown up playing such lengths. It takes time to adjust to those conditions, no matter if they support you.
You can't say if Wasim had born in SA and played there mostly, he would still ended up with an average of 26. He would known that conditions better and had bowled better there.
Again don't need to bring in bowling support factor, and yes, give marks to Steyn for adopting to SC conditions.
But you do need to realize, that Wasim and Waqar used to swing same ball which Aaqib Javed couldn't manage to do. If you are unable to prepare ball in SC, you wouldn't achieve 19 average.
That was more of an effect than a cause. A bowler balling in SC need to get ball prepared to achieve some results otherwise there is no hope of surviving. The cause was conditions and the effect was ball preparing. Had there been no cause, there would have been no effect. Thats how I am balancing these two factors.
Of course its not a direct relation as I mentioned before (you make me feel that in an eagerness to reply, you miss some important points in my post). I clearly mentioned, that posting percentages don't mean that Wasim would have got that many wickets caught had all his catches been taken.
But Wasim himself has mentioned it multiple times, that he has to rely more on inswing than outswing just because of fielders inability to hold on to catches. I totally agree, Wasim developed the methods to take wickets without the help of fielders, but that was more of a case of him being forced to do that rather that him doing it by choice. He would definitely loved to bowl more outswingers had he trusted his fielders.
The percentages just show that how much Steyn has benefited from those fielders. You simply can't deny the 'hole in the hands' of Pakistani fielders effect.
I am actually one of thise who rate McGrath better than Wasim just because overall he has achieved more than Wasim despite Wasim being more skillful. But for Steyn, I have to say that he hasn't achieved that much for me to balance out Wasim's skill factor.
Since I am not convinced him being better than Wasim, no way I could compare him with McGrath. A more fair comparison would be Steyn vs Waqar, because Waqar was similar to Steyn is respect to blowing hot and cold (though I believe Steyn would come out winner in that case but thats a better comparison).
Even I am not ruling out those things that Steyn has in comparison to Wasim. Ofc you have your own way of judging players, while you keep referring to the 'batsman inability' as my hypothesis, you haven't come close to give a point which would deny that hypothesis.
Anyways surely, we could end it here if you want. I feel like you are not thinking out of the box (you probably think the same about me). Ofc I would have loved one of us to get convinced to other so all this discussion would have more meaning, for the second time, that didn't happen.
Maybe that stats don't work for you, but I myself is more that convinced that heavy share of Steyn's wickets are because to poor batsmanship unlike Wasim. The quality of batsman increases, Steyn's wicket-taking ability deteriorates far more than Wasim.
Anyhow, cheers mate. Maybe we end up third time lucky
Haha...cheers mate.
A few points bro.
I acknowledge its not the most accurate point and I think I mentioned it somewhere too. If not, ok.
But point is this...you can't use a stat where you are not sure of its accuracy (even if the reasons are understandable) and then dispute my disagreement with it. The stat is not reliable. My bowling attack argument was only to counter that.
If its not accurate enough, drop it and move ahead. I am NOT bringing bowling attack as a major issue. It was only a point in relation to yours. Don't take it as a main point when I never mentioned it as one.
Who denies that? Its a non issue to be honest. That is his weakness and no one disputes that. You are assuming I am disputing the fact that Steyn didn't get FTBs out when they went on a rampage. I didn't.
But that weakness noway takes the shine away from him cos he has won so many matches and series for SA and turned it around AFTER these FTBs smashed him. So water under the bridge. Will be a blot but doesn't matter much in the large of things when you rate him.
I will post data to support my claim about Steyn below.
Totally agree with that.
But in the context of comparison when Steyn has beasted in SC pattas too (inspite of it being alien conditions), its irrelevant.
Now comparison between Steyn vs Wasim in SC doesn't have to be that we have to swap players and see. That's one way to look at it. We can also take them out and put them in a vaccuum (good team) and see how they would perform.
Fair enough. I am aware of it. My point was about using catch % when for Steyn, its his bread and butter. But I see where you are coming from. Fair enough bro.
Steyn has really done so much for his team's results that its unreal.
His averages on a series by series basis
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...art;template=results;type=bowling;view=series
Since 2004, Steyn has played in 32 series for South Africa.
In that, SA has lost only 4 series in total.
1 against England in 2004 (his debut series)
1 against SL in 2006
2 against Australia in 2009, 2014 (Aus always win in SA)
Now if you take matches and see (not the most comprehensive stats when it comes to showing impact but something to think about):
South Africa, Australia and Pakistan pacers from 1985 till present (averages in wins)
South Africa, Australia and Pakistan pacers from 1985 till present (averages in wins and draws)
South Africa, Australia and Pakistan pacers from 1985 till present (averages in wins) - OUTSIDE SC
South Africa, Australia and Pakistan pacers from 1985 till present (averages in wins and draws) - OUTSIDE SC
South Africa, Australia and Pakistan pacers from 1985 till present (averages in wins) - ASIA
South Africa, Australia and Pakistan pacers from 1985 till present (averages in wins and draws) - ASIA
Every single indicator....average in wins or wins and draws in outside asia or in asia....every time Steyn wins.
This is not a anomaly where stats make him look better.
Steyn fans love him because of this reason.
He will get carted.
He will not look magical at times.
He will blow hot and cold.
But when push comes to shove, he will simply come and KNOCK YOU OUT and win the game for SA.
In recent times from my memory
Spell against Aus in Perth won SA the series.
Spell against India in Durban won SA the series.
Spell against SL in forgot place won SA the series.
Spell against Pak in UAE made them draw it.
This is from 2013 recent times.
Steyn = results.
Just as much if not more than McGrath.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Not using stats as a standalone entity but watching Steyn over the years....that guy simply gets results and stats just confirm them.
Steyn has a big hand in almost every SA series win or draw (maybe barring a very very few).
And SA lost only 4 series since his debut including his debut series.
Steyn has a big hand in almost every SA series win or draw (maybe barring a very very few).
And SA lost only 4 series since his debut including his debut series.
sensible-indian-fan
ODI Star
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2013
- Runs
- 35,587
- Post of the Week
- 3
Another factor that should seal the deal for Steyn....
Here I won't take Akram's stats cos he was in a weak batting team and its hard to deduce anything from it.
Bowlers control a lot of test match results but they are dependent on their batsmen too. Can't deny that.
So let's compare Steyn with McGrath on matches lost (since both teams had good batting lineups over the years):
Steyn averages 34 when SA loses.
McGrath averages 23 when Australia loses.
Both sides have quality batting but look at how one team is dependent on Steyn and how he delivers over the years.
Steyn averages 16 when SA wins.
McGrath averages 19 when Australia wins.
Steyn averages 20 when SA wins or draws.
McGrath averages 21 when Australia wins or draws.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=2;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=2;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings
And I think this should seal it when it comes to Steyn's impact.
Here I won't take Akram's stats cos he was in a weak batting team and its hard to deduce anything from it.
Bowlers control a lot of test match results but they are dependent on their batsmen too. Can't deny that.
So let's compare Steyn with McGrath on matches lost (since both teams had good batting lineups over the years):
Steyn averages 34 when SA loses.
McGrath averages 23 when Australia loses.
Both sides have quality batting but look at how one team is dependent on Steyn and how he delivers over the years.
Steyn averages 16 when SA wins.
McGrath averages 19 when Australia wins.
Steyn averages 20 when SA wins or draws.
McGrath averages 21 when Australia wins or draws.
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=2;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...=2;template=results;type=bowling;view=innings
And I think this should seal it when it comes to Steyn's impact.
hussain123
Tape Ball Captain
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2014
- Runs
- 1,282
Not using stats as a standalone entity but watching Steyn over the years....that guy simply gets results and stats just confirm them.
Steyn has a big hand in almost every SA series win or draw (maybe barring a very very few).
And SA lost only 4 series since his debut including his debut series.
Whole lot of factors, sif.You are forgetting a while back, with kallis in the wings, they were one of the most formidable batting units in the world, if not the most.And they were always had a lethal pack attack especially in their own conditions.Not to mention, their top class fielding to complement their bowlers often than not.wasim missed on many of these luxuries steyn has.
Similar threads
